Scientists just found the biggest supermassive black hole ever

I asked you to explain in your own words how you think the sun works. This was your answer: "same way volcanos do"
Was that or was that not your reply?

- - - Updated - - -

I asked you to explain in your own words how you think the sun works. This was your answer: "same way volcanos do"
Was that or was that not your reply?

- - - Updated - - -

I asked you to explain in your own words how you think the sun works. This was your answer: "same way volcanos do"
Was that or was that not your reply?

 

Yes, that was!

Yes it was!

Ya dam right it was!

Do you know how energy exchanges one atom at a time?

Do you know the transition of mass/energy/time?

Otherwise, sit down, shut up and try reading.

Then when you find a good question that fits your current level, like.... "am I a process, alive, in nature, too?"

Then i will see that you've begun to understand how little you really know.

 

LOL my you are angry. So now that we've established that you said the sun works like a volcano (as you emphatically stated again and again and........again with explatives, do you think it will erupt and lava spew out?

 

Also, when you tell someone to "shut up and try reading" you should at least be able to form full sentences. Your above attempt at a sentence is incorrect.

 

Keep it civil, please

Shangrila
Site Moderator

 

Should I just hate em?

 

anywhoo....isnt the spaghettification effect of black holes interesting. The gravitational forces of black holes are truly staggering!

 

Okay there is a critic here explain what is in the center of our galaxy that is make stars zoom around it at millions of miles an hour, the only physical theory is there is a very massive gravity force at the center and that is based on the sun being the force moving us around it and its a standard basic star.

And you forget Dark Matter the most widely dispersed material in the cosmos which is the only reason galaxies stay together, even the might of our black hole at the center can't generate enough force to hold the galaxy in check.

 

LOL he's aleady explained it. The galaxy is a hurricane and the center is just the center of the storm nothing more..and....AND....the sun doesnt work by fusion, it works and I quote "same way volcanos do". So we have volcanoes and storms running the universe. Now you see how people like copernicus and galileo had such a hard time. There were people and still are people that thought/think the earth is flat and that everything in the universe revolved around the earth even when they were given undeniable proof otherwise.

 

then anothr

i aint the only one

but i know how the reactions occur, so be certain, i would not be considering it, if it didnt make sense.

note the non-equilibrium system,,,

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxeKL28lR28

[video=youtube;DxeKL28lR28]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxeKL28lR28[/video]

learn what a charge is and how the fields work.

perhaps read more. ie... dumb claim

that claim is bonafide ignorance.

The big bang, black hole and the 'gravity' to the center as a separate force, has been in place well before the acceptance of dark matter/energy. In FACT, the dm/de acceptance began when the hubble was put in space, they noticed that the galaxies DO NOT ROTATE as thee physics predicted and that without adding an addition 78% of mass to the universe, the whole model was wrong.

Now that is fact and google galaxy rotation mass curve and read it for yourself

 

LOL this is your answer? A homopolar motor? Its been around since 1821. No one uses them. The magnet needs to be made of conductive material. We built these in 7th grade, they were fun but a duracell and conductive magnets are not at the center of the Galaxy. There is a supermassive black hole there running the show.

 

Occam's (or Ockham's) razor is a principle attributed to the 14th century logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. Ockham was the village in the English county of Surrey where he was born.

The principle states that "Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily." Sometimes it is quoted in one of its original Latin forms to give it an air of authenticity:

"Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate"
"Frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora"
"Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem"

In fact, only the first two of these forms appear in his surviving works and the third was written by a later scholar. William used the principle to justify many conclusions, including the statement that "God's existence cannot be deduced by reason alone." That one didn't make him very popular with the Pope.

Many scientists have adopted or reinvented Occam's Razor, as in Leibniz's "identity of observables" and Isaac Newton stated the rule: "We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances."

The most useful statement of the principle for scientists is
"when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better."

 

I have a BA in physics and a MS in astronomy. Can I give my $0.02 on the matter?

 

SO THE SIMPLE PATH IS THAT GRAVITY IS THE ENTANGLEMENT OF ENERGY BETWEEN POINTS.

THE PHYSIC OF BB AND BH ARE A joke AND NOT THE SHORTEST PATH!

mY POINT IS, YOU ARE BRINGING UP AN ARGUMENT THAT FITS PERFECTLY BUT YOU ARE ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE ARGUMENT

- - - Updated - - -

sure

Be honest with this peanut gallery here. Tell them the truth; the existing model is incorrect.

Go ahead, be fair to the idiots that perhaps have never done the work

 

Now, now, let him talk. It would be nice if he learned a little politeness but I guess he get's his notion of how scientists argue from watching the mad ones on late nite tv ("Fool, all fools, laugh at me, will they?")

I myself have wondered if maybe quantum relativity, the whole Copenhagen counterintuitive conglomeration, might be a misinterpretation, like the luminferous ether, phlogiston or the "ideal gas"

The problem there is I'm not the first one to think that, many scientists have (and some, like our uncouth but erudite friend, apparently still do). So they've made experiments that either predict results based on quantum relativity's validity or not. And every single one that's been made proves QR to be right. Down to the last decimal, (and that gets pretty far). It is, hands down, the most proven theory in all of science, and this includes Newton's Laws.

Second problem with our non black hole believing friend is I've seen no equations so far, nor even an inkling of what he suggests as an alternative. No "rigor" as I think the term is, (but could be wrong) Short of that, his whole argument is like some guy ranting that all the doctors are full of it and humans are really just solid straight through, so next time his kid has a bellyache he's gonna fix it himself with power tools and save a bundle.

 

AFAIK the natural nuclear decay of radioactive elements in the earth along with the heat left over from it's former entirely molten state, are more than sufficient to keep it as hot as we think it to be. Natural reactors of fission are possible and natural fusion reactors may, indeed, exist as well deep in the Earth, but they are not, AFAIK, necessary.

As an aside, the fact that the Earth can and has produced natural fission reactors in the past has some very interesting story possibilities, if you ignore several principles of geology and physics. And we all know the facts should never spoil a good yarn.